William Lane Craig vs. Bart Ehrman - Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?

Рет қаралды 148,337

13 жыл бұрын

reasonablefaith.org - William Lane Craig vs. Bart Ehrman: "Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?" College of the Holy Cross, Worcester, Massachusetts, March 28, 2006. Craig's famous debate with Bart Erhman. More here: kzfaq.info_play_list...
Transcript: www.reasonablefaith.org/site/D...
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/
Follow Reasonable Faith On Twitter: / rfupdates
Add Reasonable Faith On Facebook: / reasonablefaithorg

Пікірлер: 45

@bencabestuff 12 жыл бұрын

Thank you for posting these videos!

@hammerman2006 13 жыл бұрын

love ur vids. Keep them coming!!

@BackToOrthodoxy 12 жыл бұрын

@DeJay14 Well, read Isaiah. The book was written centuries before Christ. When they found the Dead Sea scrolls, they found a whole book of Isaiah intact and it was word for word everything of the book of Isaiah that we have today.

@BackToOrthodoxy 13 жыл бұрын

The thing I wonder why is that William Lane Craig never brings up the prophesies in the Old Testament. I think that prophesies are one of the biggest sources Christians CAN use for apologetics.

@junaid7355 Ай бұрын

I think that is because most of the prophecies that Christians think Jesus fulfilled are said to not have been about Jesus. Jews and agnostics always tell us to read the context and when read in context it does seem they weren't about Jesus. You can read all the prophecy in Mathews that he claims Jesus fulfilled. He even mentions those prophecies that are not in the old testament. Don't know where he got those from. Check the last verses of Mathew chapter 2.

@trejeancalloway-ri1in 8 күн бұрын

Like be fr how would the Jews not know their own messiah🤣🤣

@Wedlockvideos 12 жыл бұрын

@EnlightenedReader: How is assuming naturalism in an historical context a fallacy? A naturalistic assumption is common to just about everyone including you, except for cases on special pleading.There simply isn't a rational reason to assume a miracle. It's the LEAST likely explanation by it's very definition.

@davidcardano963 3 ай бұрын

Craig is an evangelist dressed up as a historian.. Not a completely honest position one would think but quite common none the less.

@haleighsturman2239 2 ай бұрын

Bart just kept trying to get craig on some weird technicality and even that failed. He didnt do as good a job as i expect

@BackToOrthodoxy 13 жыл бұрын

@ShaneChiswick 2008?

@truthbknwn 12 жыл бұрын

Yes the tomb was empty, but THAT'S NOT IN QUESTION. The question is WHY was it empty (eg. GRAVE ROBBERY?). Jhn 20:2 has Mary M. reporting to the disciples "'They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they've laid him!" This is in spite of an earthquake and an angelic announcemt that he was missing due to having risen (Matt. 28:5). Watch my video "Was Jesus' Resurrection Physical or Spiritual?" for more.

@Chaowdur 13 жыл бұрын

@HeroOfChristArchives Craig isn't a creationist and most archbishops and priests aren't equipped with the philosophical belt that Craig holds.

@BackToOrthodoxy 12 жыл бұрын

@Falcondick69 That is where, my friend, I don't bother wasting my time. ;)

@drcraigvideos 13 жыл бұрын

@HeroOfChristArchives I'm actually not Dr. Craig. But I'm aware of that video. Thanks. Here's a rebuttal: watch?v=JX0CBq4qjuo

@JPGdesigngroup 3 ай бұрын

The fact that the people didn't understand who Yeshua was just proves Isaiah 53 to be true.

@stanleybadams 13 жыл бұрын

I advise that you work through the PhD dissertation of Thomas B Warren by Vanderbilt University. It is strong on Suffering and that all of those items that are dis-allowed by philosophers thus proving that God cannot exist. I do hold that no logical defense of the existence of God can adequately be made without understanding this material and using it in a proper manner. This material is largely responsible for Anthony Flew moving into a deistic position just before his death.

@spocklover110 13 жыл бұрын

@Templarforever -he seems like a deist. Ehrman is an agnostic.

@Wedlockvideos 12 жыл бұрын

@quakerman7: Why attack personally? A miracle is the ABSOLUTE LAST thing a thinking person would resort to for an explanation. If you examined your life you know you live that way too. You live in a naturalistic universe and you demonstrate that everyday. You only reserve a "special pleading" for miracles as an apologist. History has no access to miracles.

@user-db6vh8ff6q 5 ай бұрын

I think you overlook the miracle of life itself. It is an unbelievable MIRACLE that we exist and can discuss this. Look at the size of our universe and we to this point in human history are the only intelligible life in the universe. We also have self awareness or consciousness which to this day scientists cannot explain why or exactly what it is. We are surrounded by miracles each and every day.

@Wedlockvideos 12 жыл бұрын

@BTW, Whether god exists or not has absolutely NO bearing on whether or not miracles can or can't occur- nor does it change them being the LEAST likely to occur by their very definition.Just FYI.

@kiroshakir7935 4 ай бұрын

How If God doesn't exist Miracles are impossible since there is no power that can make a miracle If God exists Miracles are possible because there is a power that can achieve them and more importantly this power can be directed

@Wedlockvideos 4 ай бұрын

@@kiroshakir7935 What do you mean “ no other power”? A miracle is a supposed event that violates known law

@kiroshakir7935 4 ай бұрын

@@Wedlockvideos I didn't say "no other power" God by definition is an omnipotent being Omnipotence means having infinite power In other words it means being able to do anything so long The action is logically coherent For example married bachelors Is logically incoherent and self contradictory But the resurrection of Jesus doesn't lead to any logical contradictions Unlike a married bachelor And therefore by necessity has possible existence (possible existence in philosophy is any state of affairs that doesn't contradict the laws of logic) And if an omnipotent being exist Then it logically follows that this being can resurrect someone from the dead Secondly you didn't disprove the resurrection as a logical impossibility The mere fact that we don't see people rising from the dead Doesn't serve as conclusive evidence that it can't happen

@Wedlockvideos 4 ай бұрын

@@kiroshakir7935 No, previously you did, and you haven’t shown that “ god” by definition is ANYTHING. What you’ve done is assert something without basis

@Wedlockvideos 4 ай бұрын

If I tell you that my rabbit foot has omnipotent powers , or by definition is such, that would be asserting something

@BackToOrthodoxy 12 жыл бұрын

@Falcondick69 But we have the Dead Sea Scrolls that prove that they were. There is no scholar in existence that says the Dead Sea Scrolls are post-Christian era.

@quakerman7 12 жыл бұрын

At 34:00, Ehrman ... what a dufus. Miracles are highly improbable. Has anybody heard Ravi Zacharias or John Lennox speak on this? The whole point of a miracle is that its very unusualness highlights its as a distinct event. We know something big has happened because something Big has happened. If nothing Big ever happened, we wouldn't even have the concept of 'miracle' in our lexicon. A miracle, I say, is no less probable than Existence itself.

@DeJay14 13 жыл бұрын

@xchampx the only objection i hear is that the diciples read through those and made up christs fulfillment's of them i dont believe that of course

@Lacocacolaman 12 жыл бұрын

Is this really Bart Ehrman? or is it *Rafael Pull mask off* Deputy Barney Fife! I rest my case.

@mmh5481 5 ай бұрын

Bart- straight to the point, facts, evidence WLC- word salad, miracles, fantasies

@greglogan7706 6 ай бұрын

It is evident that Craig misunderstood what Bart meant by marginalized Yet that was simple concept to understand in the first place - his painful misunderstanding begins to indicate to me that maybe not Bill is not very bright - he just has a lot of smart sounding shtick.

@giska1000 13 жыл бұрын

@SurvivalGear63 you should watch Wiliam Lane Craig on bart ehrman 6 parts...Bart Ehrman is i am convinced christian...but somehow he refuses to admit it and he claims he ,,left faith,, because of ,,problem of evil,,....i mean....how can you reject faith because of ,,rpoblem of evil,,??when that question is self destructing??...